NO Anglophone Caribbean government in recent decades has come under as much scrutiny during its first months in office as our current APNU+AFC coalition government. It is customary for new governments to be allowed the proverbial honeymoon period, with the understanding that that time represents a transition from the old to the new. However, this government has not had that luxury. It has been in office for a mere seven months, but if one were to judge from the criticisms of the opposition PPP and the commentaries in the media, it seems more like three years. The big consequence is that the government has not had the space needed to settle into its own mode of operation. It has had to simultaneously try to put its own stamp on the governmental process and defend itself against an avalanche of criticisms, including some glaringly unjustified ones.
The PPP, still smarting from the shock of losing power, has been the most uncooperative and uncomplimentary opposition. It has gone as far as rejecting national unity talks. Instead, it pontificates on every issue in a manner that suggests its objective is criticism simply for the sake of doing so. What is even more nauseating, is that it barefacedly seeks to hold this new government responsible for all its failings when it occupied the seat of power mere months ago. The daily rantings by its top leaders, replete with threats against and slander of the government cut a sorry picture. There is not even a hint of patriotism or goodwill; it’s as if the government is an invading force.
Some may argue that the PPP is merely doing what a serious opposition is supposed to do. While there is some merit to that argument, in the final analysis the opposition is part of the government. In that regard, it does have a responsibility to ensure that its oversight of the government is constructive and not destructive. Clearly, the PPP is mindful of its own questionable stewardship of the country for over two decades. So criticism of the government is less about oversight and more about creating a distraction and in the process, putting the government on the defensive. Mr Jagdeo has made clear that the PPP is solely concerned with regaining power at the next election.
The government has in the last seven months had to also face criticism from some of its own independent-minded supporters. This is new territory; the general rule has been that government supporters do not openly criticise the government. It must be somewhat frustrating for a government that is trying to find its feet. Although fraternal critique is qualitatively different from malicious criticism, often the effect is the same. Much of the fraternal criticism is aimed at holding the government to an ethos of accountability and democracy and questioning the pace of reform.
So far the government has responded well to its critics. It has pushed back against the PPP’s demonisation with success. Crucially, it has not sought to silence the PPP. This is evident by the very fact that the PPP’s viewpoints are given full coverage in the state-owned media—a drastic departure from the PPP’s attitude when it held the seat of power. In the end a government is judged not only by the success of its policies, but equally by how it deals with dissent.